Mott MacDonald NTB Jan Feb 2011
 

EE-News
News and announcements from EE Publishers  Issue 142, June 2011
EE-News masthead

  

On fracking in the Karoo, open forums and the power of public opinion...

by Mark Botha and Chris Yelland, EE Publishers

 

To comment and respond to this article, and/or to any of the views and positions expressed, visit EE Publishers' blog: "The best from EE Publishers...", click on the article title, and respond.


The debate around hydraulic fracturing in the Karoo is an issue of national and public interest. Shale gas extraction has the potential, some say, to change the face of the country's power industry and improve the lives of millions of South Africans. Public opinion, however, is a powerful force well-known to have hampered the nuclear industry in the past... (more)


South Africa is home to the world's fifth-largest shale gas reserves, a resource seen as a potential "game changer" in the energy sector. Shale gas could add much-needed primary energy diversity to the country's power generation industry, and create jobs in gas-to-liquid plants, combined-cycle gas turbine (CCGT) power stations, steel works and a variety of other plants, factories and secondary commercial, business, transport and hospitality activities.


Extracting the shale gas, however, calls for the process of hydraulic fracturing (or "fracking") in the Karoo, an issue considered highly controversial by those who, like Umvoto technical director and former UCT associate professor of geological sciences Dr. Chris Hartnady, approach the matter with caution: Will the full life-cycle "fugitive" emissions and greenhouse-effects of shale gas extraction, they ask, indeed be lower than that of coal? Does the economics make sense when measured on the basis of energy return on energy invested? Would drilling in the Karoo affect the geological stability of the region and increase the likelihood of earthquakes? What of the integrity of sub-surface water resources?


These and other concerns are widely echoed, turning the "fracking debate" into an issue of national and public interest. Already this has resulted in a government-announced moratorium on the licensing of exploration for shale gas in the Karoo. This affords government, oil and gas companies, the media and the public an opportunity to reflect, engage and debate the issues in an open and transparent way at a scientific, economic, social, engineering and environmental level, rather than at a knee-jerk, emotional, environmental level, in order to reach a rational decision in the public and national interest as to whether fracking in the Karoo should continue or not.


Such a forum was provided recently when EE Publishers and the Johannesburg Press Club convened a public debate at the Axiz Auditorium, Midrand, entitled "Fracking in the Karoo - for and against...". This brought together diverse expert presenters to express their views and argue the case, thus raising media and public awareness, improving the understanding of the issues, and thereby resulting in better informed opinions.


The motion that was debated was framed in terms of the usual "green" activist agenda, namely: "This house believes that the current moratorium on the exploration and production of shale gas in the Karoo through the technique known as hydraulic fracturing, or 'fracking', should be extended indefinitely, and that fracking in the Karoo in its current form should be abandoned."


Speaking in favour of fracking were Prof. Philip Lloyd of the Energy Institute at the Cape Peninsula University of Technology (CPUT), and well-know journalist and writer, Ivo Vegter. The case against fracking was argued by Dr. Chris Hartnady and water resource scientist Dr. Anthony Turton, professor at the University of the Free State's (UFS') Centre for Environmental Management. The debate was moderated by Dr. Rod Crompton, the member of the board of the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA) responsible for regulating petroleum pipelines. Also invited to participate, but whose only contribution was their telling absence, were Sasol and Shell, two companies vying for shale gas exploration licences in the Karoo.
 
The general consensus indicated by a vote after the debate was that, although the risks are significant, the proper use of regulation could transfer most of these risks to the companies involved, while the benefits to South Africa as a whole would outweigh the dangers. 


A case in point is the matter of water use and contamination. Fracking would require some 1000 m3 of water per gas well - a real concern in a water-restrained country. Dr. Turton pointed out that South Africa had entered an era of trade-offs, one such being between energy and water. In his response, Mr. Vegter pointed out the "irrelevance" of how or where the required water would be sourced, as long as fracking did not tap into the nation's 45-billion litre national fresh-water resource.


Prof. Lloyd argued that there was "minimal" evidence that water used in fracking had ever contaminated underground drinking water. He said the additives used in the water during fracking constituted only 0,5% by volume, and even if the "contaminated" water were mixed with drinking water, it would still be fit for human consumption. 


Prof. Lloyd also stressed that the deep underground water in the Karoo was, in any case, brackish and contaminated with natural uranium radio-activity and arsenic, and was already unfit for human consumption. In any event, it was stated that as with many other industrial processes, waste water from the fracking process could be treated properly, and potential spillage could be easily mitigated. "Industrial waste," said Mr. Vegter, "is no new problem".


Dr. Hartnady pointed out that prospecting companies would have to absorb the full project life-cycle costs, and that obtaining licenses and sourcing water would be costly. Rather than measuring the upstream and downstream costs in monetary terms, he said, they should be measured in terms of energy. The energy return on energy invested was poor, and if the full life-cycle of fracking was taken into account, the total greenhouse gas emissions may be higher than those of coal generation, and not lower as was held by the pro-fracking camp.


Dr. Turton proposed that water, energy, climate and agricultural scientists, policymakers and practitioners need to forge a transparent policy on fracking and on the "super nexus" of water, energy, food and global climate change. Meanwhile, he said, the "precautionary principle" should apply. Prof. Lloyd responded that the so-called precautionary principle was fundamentally philosophically flawed in such matters, and in practice could not be applied in the context of fracking, whose viability and worth could never be proven one way or another without exploration and pilot production to establish the extent and sustainability of the shale gas resource, and to confirm its economics and environmental impact.


Fracking had the potential, Prof. Lloyd said, to change South Africa's energy economy and create "thousands" of jobs. The potential gas resource was the in the order of 1000-trillion cubic feet, making this country's unconventional gas resource second only to those of Argentina, China, Mexico and the USA. He said the potential environmental impacts were "manageable" and that the relatively small footprint of fracking plants would make them "nearly invisible" in the Karoo.


Dr. Turton noted that South Africa was entering a period that would be defined by a new social contract based on trust. Large companies, he said, were realising that the business landscape was changing, that society was demanding - and deserved - transparent information, with respect for communities and environmental impact assessments that are rigorous and truthful. In Mr. Vegter's words, "a developing country [like South Africa] cannot afford to have a pathological distrust of capitalism or industrial development."


On this issue of trust, Sasol's and Shell's absence and lack of engagement with the media at the debate spoke volumes. Initially they complain about the level of the public discourse. Then when there are serious scientific, engineering and environmental issues to answer, they retreat behind classic corporate defensive behaviour and decline to participate, preferring instead to engage behind closed doors with the powers that be, out of public and media scrutiny. Or perhaps the energy companies are simply too complacent about the need to get their acts together, engage openly and respond honestly to justifiable public concerns. The anti-nuclear sentiment of the past two decades is a case in point. The nuclear industry, with its huge financial, scientific and engineering resources, let a well-organised but amateur legion of environmental and anti-nuclear activists run rings around them to delay the peaceful application of nuclear power for decades. In so doing, the nuclear industry let itself down badly.
 
The vast expanses of the Karoo are dotted with picturesque towns with a colonial heritage. However, those who would like to retain the Karoo in its current pristine state would do well to remember that the outskirts of these towns are also home to a significant majority of shanty dwellers living in varying degrees of abject poverty. These voters are desperate for change and opportunity, aspire to improved living conditions, jobs, housing, clinics and schools, and look to local and national government and the private sector to improve their fate. 


The motion debated was framed in terms of the usual "green" activist agenda, namely: "This house believes that the current moratorium on the exploration and production of shale gas in the Karoo through the technique known as hydraulic fracturing, or 'fracking', should be extended indefinitely, and that fracking in the Karoo in its current form should be abandoned". After hearing the arguments both for and against, the motion was overwhelming defeated in a vote with a majority of more than 2 to 1.


The outcome suggests that the public and the media in South Africa are indeed open and receptive to rational debate, and are not prepared to simply go along with the green activist agenda to STOP FRACKING NOW. This is not to say that the defeat of the motion at the debate should be seen as simply pro-fracking or a green light to proceed with fracking in the Karoo forthwith. Rather, the defeat of the motion may be seen as a pragmatic acknowledgement that further studies and exploration of the shale gas resource in South Africa needs to proceed with due care to determine its potential, size, depth, sustainability, environmental impact, etc., so that the resource can be properly evaluated, and a rational, informed decision made in due course on whether or not to proceed with natural gas production in the national and public interest.


The debate was hosted on 24 May 2011, one day after a UK parliamentary committee found no evidence to support the need for the implementation of a moratorium on drilling for unconventional gas, and a week after the French parliament voted to ban fracking, a decision that must still be approved by the senate in France before becoming law.

 

To comment and respond to this article, and/or to any of the views and positions expressed, visit EE Publishers' blog: "The best from EE Publishers...", click on the article title, and respond.

 
e-Zine_PaperLi
e-Zine_CitizenJounalism
Twitter
Flash editions
HTML editions
Print editions
e-Newsletters
e-Zine_Archive_Gradient
Blog
RSS feeds
Podcasts
In this issue...
On fracking in the Karoo, open forums and the power of public opinion
Your journals...
(Flash flip-page edition)
Energize e-Zine May 2011
  
  
(Flash flip-page edition)
Vector e-Zine May 2011
  
  
(Flash flip-page edition)
EngineerIT_e-Zine_May_2011
  
  
(Flash flip-page edition)
  
Published by
EE Publishers

P O Box 458
Muldersdrift
1747
South Africa

Tel 0115437000
Fax 0115437025

Subscribe
(no cost)
View and subscribe to EE Publishers' new electronic, Flash "flip-page" e-magazines, EngineerIT e-Zine, Energize e-Zine, Vector e-Zine and PositionIT e-Zine.

There is no cost to subscribe, and there is now no need to login with a username and/or password.
Experience this exciting new technology and get all the benefits provided